Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.

IIT Project Management Class: Risk Management Plan

This is a simulated Risk Management Plan for the fictional company Intwit's development of Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition. It was created for a Project Management Class at the Illinois Institute of Technology

2.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 2 3/21/2011
1. Introduction
1.1 Review of Project Importance
The project to develop the cloud-based Intwit Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition software
package is of inestimable importance for the future of the Intwit. This project is being developed
for our most important customer: the state of Illinois. Our government contract with the state of
Illinois offers the potential to expand our expertise in personal and corporate financial software
into the realm of government budgeting and tax policy. Given the connection between Illinois and
the current administration in Washington, success with the state of Illinois will open opportunities
for Intwit to develop similar cloud-based financial software packages at the federal level. Our
aggressive bid for this government contract was based on our estimates that the development of
this project would take six months and cost $1 million. According to the contract, 50% of cost
overruns between $1 and $1.1 million are reimbursed by the state of Illinois, and absolutely
nothing is reimbursed above $1.1 million. The absolute deadline for the delivery of the product
for validation by the office of the State Treasurer is 31AUG2011. Failure to meet this deadline
results in a $100,000 penalty per calendar month. Due to state policy, this software must be
developed using the Windows Azure platform.
1.2 Purpose
Given the importance of this contract, this Project Risk Management Plan (RMP) seeks to ensure
project success by minimizing the likelihood and impact of risk by thoroughly identifying,
estimating, and evaluating risk in order to develop a robust plan to implement and monitor cost-
effective mitigation steps. Because this project involves a new technology, a new and important
client, a very aggressive timeline, and strict penalties for time overruns, it is essential to project
success that the RMP be given far greater importance than on previous projects.
1.3 Scope
The scope of this document pertains to the Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development
Project and its internal and external risks. The risk management methodology of this project will
be used primarily by the Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project throughout its
project cycle.
1.4 References
1.4.1 Best Practices Website
For guidance on the Intwit risk management methodology, please refer to the Intwit best practices
website at http://bestpractices.intwit.com. Note: Intwit user authentication is required.
1.4.2 External References
• The template for this Risk Management Plan (RMP) is modified from the California Office
of Systems Integration (OSI) Best Practices website at
http://www.bestpractices.osi.ca.gov/sysacq/documents/risk%20management%20plan%2
0(3283).doc. It also uses the Microsoft Word RMP template developed by Pcubed and
found at http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/templates/project-risk-management-plan-
TC001145558.aspx
• PMBOK Guide, 4
th
Edition.
• Illinois State Office of the Chief Information Officer Information Technology Project
Oversight Framework- Section 3: Risk Management and Escalation Procedures
• FAR 402.709 on Government Contracts.
https://www.acquisition.gov/far/html/Subpart%2042_7.html
1.4.3 Project Risk Database

3.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 3 3/21/2011
Refer to the Project Risk Database located at <imaginary server address>.
1.5 Document Maintenance
This document will be reviewed periodically and updated as needed. When a change is made,
the updated revision number, date, author, and change description must be included on the table
located on the cover sheet.
2. Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities
Role Risk Management Responsibility Assignment
Project Manager Responsible for (1) writing and
implementing the Project
Management Plan for the Intwit 2020:
Indominable Edition Development
Project and (2) reporting progress to
the Project Sponsor and the office of
the Illinois State Treasurer.
Sean McBride
Project Team: Responsible for completing the
project work by following the
guidance of the PM in completing the
components of the Work Breakdown
Structure according to requirements.
Sue – system architect
Joe and Sam – programmers
Mary – business analysis /
customer rep (requirements)
Pete – quality assurance
Project Sponsor Responsible for reviewing the project
and assisting the PM in coordinating
with key corporate and government
personnel.
Dennis Hood
Client Responsible for (1) coordinating with
the PM each Wednesday at 10am
throughout the project lifecycle, (2)
contacting the various departments
and determine the specific
customization and functionality they
need, and (3) maintaining this
information in the departmental
functionality roster located on the
Intwit servers.
The state of Illinois. POC is
the office of the Illinois State
Treasurer.
End-Users Responsible for coordinating with the
POC in the office of the Illinois State
Treasurer to determine required
custom features for the department.
The various government
departments of the state of
Illinois.

4.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 4 3/21/2011
3. Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Ed. Development Project Risk Management
3.1 Identify Risks
Due to Intwits relative inexperience (i) working with state government and (ii) developing a cloud-
based software package using the Windows Azure platform, the most critical risks involved in the
Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project revolve around government
requirements and competence in the new technology.
Risk Type Risk and Description Example
Risk 1
Scope
The customer (state of Illinois) insists
on new requirements.
Illinois realizes that the product
requires a special capability to track
National Guard expenses
Risk 2
Scope
A change in applicable federal
regulations occurs unexpectedly.
The Obama Administration creates
a new set of requirements for state
government information systems
that detail programs involved in
federal revenue sharing
Risk 3
Human Resources
The software developers lack
experience working with a required
technology.
Because Intwit has previously used
different technologies, Joe and Sam
have little experience developing for
the Windows Azure platform,
potentially causing delays in project
completion.
Risk 4
Communications
Unanticipated bureaucratic
paperwork result in time-consuming
process overhead
Intwit underestimates the time
needed to fill out government forms
required of state contractors.
Risk 5
Human Resources
The process of obtaining
government-mandated security and
credit checks takes longer than
anticipated
It takes an extra six weeks for key
project personnel to obtain the
necessary background checks to
work with government data.

5.
Confidential
Slowen 2020 Risk Management Plan
February, 2011
3.2 Analyze Risks
Risk and Description Impact Impact ($) Likelihood Likelihood (%) Exposure ($)
Risk #1:
The customer (state of
Illinois) insists on new
requirements.
Due to the structure of state government, a sudden
increase in scope requirements would likely relate
to the specific departmental capability demands.
Due to our Object-oriented methodology, such
changes would allow us to leave our core program
unchanged while using inheritance and
polymorphism for the new requirements. Based off
previous experience working with the various
“silos” of older corporations, Intwit assumes that an
unanticipated increase in project scope would likely
increase personnel costs by $15,000 and delay the
project by one week. This delay would trigger a
$100,000 penalty from the state of Illinois.
Medium
$115,000
Because the state of Illinois has
approximately 75 separate departments that
would each use this software package, the
likelihood of unanticipated departmental
changes to interdepartmental state projects is
high. Intwit has examined previous
interdepartmental initiatives and found that
new department-level requirements caused
time-overruns 60% of the time.
High
60%
Medium
$69,000
Risk #2:
A change in applicable
federal regulations occurs
unexpectedly.
An unanticipated change in federal regulations
would likely concern issues of information security
and interoperability. Because these issues would
require a substantial redevelopment of the software
package at the most basic level, core components
of the software system would have to be
redesigned and re-implemented. Previous
experience with this sort of redesign has led Intwit
to estimate a cost overrun of $200,000.
Additionally, this overrun would likely lead to a
month delay, which would trigger a $100,000
penalty from the state of Illinois.
High
$300,000
Intwit recently consulted with Booz Allen
Hamilton on the likelihood of a INFOSEC
overhaul during the lifecycle of the project.
Their report states that far reaching federal
regulations that affect state level initiatives
generally only occur every few years following
election cycles, but that recent financial
concerns have dramatically reduced the
likelihood of such legislation. They forecast a
15% chance that the project will be impacted
by federal regulations during the course of the
government contract.
Low
15%
Medium
$45,000
Risk #3:
Key personnel lack needed
experience in certain
technologies.
Although the Windows Azure platform is touted as
quick to learn, lack of experience in the project
team would cause Intwit to develop the software
package much less efficiently than on other recent
projects. A recent study in an industry publication
states that transitioning to Windows Azure
effectively adds an additional 25% of man hours to
complete over the first five projects, after which the
technology is 25% more efficient than other
technologies. Intwit estimates that the project
would require 25% more development time if the
personnel were to learn Azure on-job, which would
lead to a $100,000 penalty and cost $50,000 in
personnel expenses that otherwise would work on
future projects.
Medium
$150,000
Both Joe and Sam claim some remedial
knowledge of Windows Azure (through a
conference they went to last year). Although
they claim that they could learn the
technology on-job without any major delays,
neither of them has actually used the
software before. Additionally, although both
claim strong experience with cloud-computing
through previous employers, a recent career
survey indicated that some 25% of
programmers exaggerate their expertise to be
hired for a job. Because Intwit has never
before developed on the platform before,
there is a high chance that development on
this platform would require the project team to
work overtime. Intwit estimates this likelihood
at 90%.
High
90%
High
$135,000

6.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 6 3/21/2011
Risk #4:
Unanticipated bureaucratic
paperwork result in time-
consuming process
overhead
Our business rep, Mary, has no experience dealing
with government clients. According to a recent
survey on government red tape, Illinois requires on
average five times as many documents as a
similarly sized corporate project. The state of
Illinois recently tried to become more efficient by
switching to a propriety paperless digital document
system. We estimate that these additional
documents and the new state digital document
system would create project bottlenecks of up to
2.5 weeks, which would lead to a $100,000 penalty
and $10,000 in additional personnel costs
Medium
$110,000
Because Intwit has little experience working
with state governments, it is important to
compare to known statistics. A recent article
in the Harvard Business Review states that
over 80% of first-time government contractors
experience significant project bottlenecks due
to bureaucratic paperwork.
High
80%
Medium
$88,000
Risk #5:
The process of obtaining
government-mandated
security and credit checks
takes longer than
anticipated
According to the state security office website, while
it takes on average three weeks for 80% of
applicants to obtain the necessary state
clearances, numerous extraordinary factors can
lead to additional delay (averaging 2 months) for
20% of applicants. Intwit estimates that one
member of the project team will experience
abnormal delays, which will delay the project by
two months. This would lead to penalties of
$200,000 and additional personnel costs of
$50,000
Low
$250,000
According to the state website, 20% of
applicants experience a significant delay.
Because there are five team members (the
PM already has clearance from military
service), each with an 80% chance of delay,
there is an aggregate 57% chance of at least
one person experiencing a delay
Medium
57%
High
$142,500

8.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 8 3/21/2011
Risk 1: The state of Illinois insists on new requirements due to departmental demands.
Mitigation Option 1: Renegotiate Late Penalty at a Per-Diem Rate
Risk 1 Net Exposure Reduction of $46.601.40 at the cost of $50,000
Aggregate Net Exposure Reduction of $98,605.50 at the cost of $50,000
The high exposure of Risk One relates to the 60% likelihood that superficial last-minute department-level
demands for functionality will trigger the contract’s $100k penalty for exceeding the deadline by up to one
month. Because this risk would likely only lead do delays of one week, Intwit could renegotiate the
contract with the state of Illinois to have the $100,000 penalty reassessed at a per diem date of $3,333.
Intwit’s legal department claims that there is precedent for this renegotiation and estimates that the
renegotiation would cost $50,000. Once renegotiated, a one week delay would cost $23,331 rather than
$100,000, which (after adding the added $15,000 of personnel costs) would reduce net exposure to
$22,398.60.
Please note that this mitigation option would affect the time-overrun penalty for all risks. This would
significantly reduce the impact of all Risks across the board.
• Risk 1: Savings of 23 days of penalty at per-diem rate reduces impact to $38,331 and exposure
to $22,398.60. Net exposure reduction of $46,601.40
• Risk 2: No savings
• Risk 3: Savings of 7 days of penalty at per-diem rate reduces impact to $119,993 and exposure
to $107.993.70. Net exposure reduction of $11,999.30
• Risk 4: Savings of 12 days of penalty at per-diem rate reduces impact to $69,994 and exposure
to $47,995.20, yielding a net exposure reduction of $40,004.80
• Risk 5: No savings.
Risks and their Exposure at Per-Diem and Monthly Penalties
R2: $45k
R5: $142.5k
R1(per-diem): $22k
R3(per-diem): $108k
R4(per-diem): $48k
R1(monthly): $69k
R3(monthly): $135k
R4(monthly): $88k
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Likelihood (%)
Impact($)

9.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 9 3/21/2011
Mitigation Option 2: Hire Outside Contractor to formally assess Departmental Needs
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $69,000 at the cost of $50,000
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $22,398 at the cost of $50,000
By hiring an outside contractor to determine the exact functionality requirements of the Illinois state
departments, the likelihood of last-minute departmental demands could be reduced substantially. A
contractor would coordinate with the 75 state departments to check their needs in the first month of the
project for $50,000. Included is a guarantee to cover any cost overages that would occur due to
departmental demands after the first month of the project. This would reduce net exposure to 0 by
transferring risk to the contractor at the cost of $50,000. This is logical if the exposure is $69,000
because of the penalty being assessed passed on months, but it is not logical if the exposure has already
been reduced to $22,398.60 by a change to a per-diem penalty.
Risk One with Mitigation Option 2 at Per-Diem and Monthly Penalties
R1(per-diem): $22k
R1(monthly): $69k
R1 (with M2): $0k
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
50% 52% 54% 56% 58% 60% 62% 64% 66% 68% 70%
Likelihood (%)
Impact($)

10.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 10 3/21/2011
Risk 2: A change in applicable federal regulations occurs unexpectedly.
Mitigation Option 1: Clarify the Contract
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $30,000
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $30,000
As it currently stands, Intwit must deliver a product that “comply with federal regulations” no later than
31AUG2011. The contract is ambiguous whether this refers to the federal regulations as of when the
contract was signed or as of when the project is due. The legal department believes that it can
successfully argue that the contract only requires compliance with federal regulations in effect when the
contract was signed for the cost of $30,000. This would reduce the net exposure of this risk to 0 by
transferring this risk to the state of Illinois.
Mitigation Option 2: Insure the Risk
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $60,000
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $60,000
A DC insurance company has offered insurance against all costs incurred as a result of federal regulatory
changes since the signing of the contract for the cost of $60,000. This would reduce the net exposure of
this risk to 0 by transferring this risk to the insurance company.
Risk Two with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R2: $45k
R2(w /M1 or M2): $0k
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
14% 14% 14% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 16% 16% 16%
Likelihood (%)
Impact($)

11.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 11 3/21/2011
Risk 3: Key personnel lack experience in the Windows Azure platform.
Mitigation Option 1: Send Developers to Microsoft Training
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $102,500 at the cost of $60,000
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $77,995.45 at the cost of $60,000
Microsoft offers a three-week bootcamp for developers to learn the Windows Azure platform at the cost of
$15,000 per person. The promotional material for this training event claims that graduates of this
program are “experts in the technology, ready to take on any challenges using the Azure platform.” After
speaking to a Microsoft representative about Intwit’s specific training needs, we estimate that sending
Sue, Joe, Sam, and Pete to this training would lower the likelihood of a delay resulting in cost and time
overruns from 90% to 25%. This would also reduce our estimate of cost overruns in personnel costs
down to $20,000. Under the monthly penalty model, impact for this risk would become $130,000 and
likelihood would be 25%. This would lower exposure by $102,500 at the cost of $60,000. Under the per-
diem penalty model, impact for this risk would $99,993 and likelihood would be 25%. This would lower
exposure by $77,995.45 at the cost of $60,000.
Mitigation Option 2: Hire Additional Developers with the Required Skills and Clearances
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $97,500 at the cost of $140,000
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $77,995.45 at the cost of $140,000
Intwit research has concluded that hiring a Windows Azure developer with Illinois state clearances would
require a $100,000 salary plus benefits, bringing the approximate annual cost of this individual to
$140,000. Although reducing risk likelihood to 25% (thereby reducing net exposure by 97,500), this
option would commit Intwit to hiring another person beyond this current project. The Director of Human
Resources explicitly barred this option due to the need to cut long-term personnel costs.
Risk Three with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R3(monthly w / M2): $37.5k R3(monthly): $135k
R3(per-diem): $108k
R3(monthly w / M1): $32.5k
R3(per-diem w / M1):
$30.2k
R3(per-diem w / M2): $30k
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Likelihood (%)
Impact($)

12.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 12 3/21/2011
Risk 4: Unanticipated Bureaucratic Paperwork results in Time-Consuming Process Overhead
Mitigation Option 1: Authorize Overtime at Double Pay to make up for Personnel Shortfall
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $77,000 at the cost of $13,500
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $41,000 at the cost of $13,500
Because Mary has proven herself as capable and quick to learn, offering her the incentive of double pay
overtime would encourage her to work longer days to prevent project bottlenecks from occurring. Intuit
estimates that the extra work involved with government paperwork and learning the government
document system would amount to around 150 hours. Mary typically earns $45 per hour, so her double
overtime rate would be $90 per hour. This would cost the firm an additional $13,500, but it would lower
the likelihood of this risk to 10% by encouraging Mary to work extra hours to prevent bureaucratic paper
requirements from contributing to project bottlenecks.
Mitigation Option 2: Subcontract with a firm specializing in Illinois state paperwork requirement
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $88,000 at the cost of $75,000
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $48,000 at the cost of $75,000
Intwit has enquired about the possibility of subcontracting with a firm specializing in Illinois state
documents. The firm possesses all required security clearances and has experience working with the
new state digital document system. For a fee of $15 per document page, the firm will complete all state
documents and input them into the digital document system within a guaranteed timeframe of three
business days. This would effectively reduce the likelihood of this risk to 0%. Based off an article from
the Harvard Business Review, Intwit expects to have to file 5,000 pages of state documents, meaning
that it would cost $75,000 to reduce exposure to zero.
Risk Four with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R4(monthly): $88k
R4(monthly w /M1): $11k
R4(monthly w /M2): $0k
R4(per-diem): $48k
R4(per-diem w /M1): $7k
R4(per-diem w /M2): $0k
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Likelihood (%)
Impact($)

13.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 13 3/21/2011
Risk 5: The process of obtaining government-mandated security and credit checks takes longer
than anticipated
Mitigation Option 1: Hire a Contractor for the Project with the Required Skills and Clearances
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $100,000.
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $100,000.
A contractor with the required state clearances and experience in Windows Azure has sign a six month contract
to help with the project for $100,000. Taking on this contractor would reduce the impact of this risk to $0 by
making up an employee held up by state clearances. Under both penalty systems, this would lead to a net
exposure reduction of $142,000.
Mitigation Option 2: Authorize Overtime at Double Pay to make up for Personnel Shortfall
At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $48,000.
At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $48,000.
Rather than hiring a contractor, Intwit could also offer the development staff that are able to obtain clearances
double overtime to make up for the time lost waiting for personnel to obtain state clearances. A delay of two
months for one team member would lead to a loss of 320 work hours. Due to exhaustion, overtime hours are
only 2/3 as effective as normal hours for developers. Joe, Sam, Sue, and Pete all earn $50/hour, meaning that
Intwit would have to pay $48,000 of overtime over the life of the project to make up for the hours lost. Under
both penalty systems, this would lead to a net exposure reduction of $142,000.
Risk Four with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R5: $142.5k
R5(w /M1 and M2): $0k
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
50% 51% 52% 53% 54% 55% 56% 57% 58% 59% 60%
Likelihood (%)
Impact($)

14.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 14 3/21/2011
Monitoring Plan
Risk Management Process and Activities
Risk Management
Activity & Ownership
Risk Management Task Description Mitigation Plan
Risk #1:
The customer (state of
Illinois) insists on new
requirements.
Project Manager
Intwit Legal Department
The PM will contact the legal department
immediately to begin operations to change the
structure of the penalty in the project contract.
The PM will video teleconference with the POC in
the office of State Treasurer each Wednesday at
10:00am to discuss progress. During this time, the
PM will solicit the POC for any feedback regarding
required functionality from the various state
departments. The POC will update a file stored on
Intwit servers that contains a departmental
functionality roster that details required customization
for each department. Changes to the file result in an
auto-notification to smartphones of the PM and the
POC. This file serves as the measurement
approach, and updates to this file serve as the
trigger point for updating the WBS. The individual
cells associated with each department are the
metrics for this risk.
Mitigation Option 1 will be
initiated immediately in order to
replace the current penalty
structure of the government
contract with a per-diem
alternative. Mitigation Option 2
is the contingency option and
will only be executed if Illinois
denies the request to change
to a per-diem structure AND
over half of the departments
have yet to respond with their
required functionality one
month into the project.
Risk #2:
A change in applicable
federal regulations
occurs unexpectedly
Project Manager
Intwit Legal Department
The PM will contact the legal department
immediately to begin operations to clarify which party
bears the responsibility for Federal regulatory
changes.
Until Intwit is found to not be responsible for
regulatory changes, the PM will consult reports from
Booz Allen Hamilton bimonthly regarding applicable
regulatory changes. If applicable changes do occur
before Intwit is absolved of legal responsibility, the
PM will adjust the WBS and other project documents
to comply with the regulatory change.
Mitigation Option 1 will be
carried out immediately.
Mitigation Option 2 will not be
executed in any circumstance.
If Mitigation Option 1 fails, then
Intwit will accept the risk and
seek to integrate regulatory
changes into the project
documents as quickly as
possible.
Risk #3:
Key personnel lack
needed experience in
certain technologies.
Project Manager
Development Staff
The PM will enroll the Development Staff in the
appropriate Microsoft Azure training ASAP.
The Development Staff will complete the training
Mitigation Option 1 will be
carried out immediately.
Mitigation Option 2 will not be
executed in any circumstance.
Intwit assumes that the
Microsoft training will prove
sufficient to prepare the
development staff for the
project, and Intwit will accept
any residual exposure.

15.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 15 3/21/2011
Risk #4:
Unanticipated
bureaucratic paperwork
result in time-consuming
process overhead
Project Manager
Human Resources
Business Analyst /
Customer Rep.
The PM will contact Human Resources to have them
authorize the Business Analyst to work overtime at
double pay. At the start of business each Monday,
the Business Analyst will present the Project
Manager with a report detailing overtime worked and
the backlog of government documents to be filled. If
the backlog of documents exceeds 100 pages, then
the Project Manager will send all documents in
excess of 100 pages to the contractor specializing in
Illinois government documents.
Mitigation Option 1 will be
carried out immediately.
Mitigation Option 2 will be
carried out as a contingency
plan if the Business Analyst
reports to the Project Manager
a backlog of documents
exceeding 100 pages, but only
for those documents in excess
of 100 pages.
Risk #5:
The process of obtaining
government-mandated
security and credit
checks takes longer than
anticipated
Project Manager
Human Resources
Development Staff
If not all of members of the project team have
received their state clearances by the start of project
work, then the PM will contact Human Resources to
have them authorize the development personnel to
work overtime at double pay. At the start of business
each Monday, the System Architect will present the
Project Manager with a report detailing overtime
worked and the backlog of government documents
to be filled. If the combined overtime worked is less
than 20 hours per week (the amount needed to
provide 150% of the hours missed by a two month
absence) OR if the missing staff member has not
received his/her security clearance by the end of the
sixth project week, then the PM will contact the
contractor to offer work prorated for the time
remaining in the project.
Mitigation Option 2 will be
carried out immediately.
Mitigation Option 1 will be
carried out as a contingency
plan if the remaining
development staff work less
than 20 hours of combines
overtime each week OR if the
missing members of the project
team have not received the
required security clearances
six weeks into the project.
Risk Management Plan Approvals
Prepared by:
Sean McBride, Project Manager
Approved by:
Dennis Hendry, Project Sponsor
Dr. C. Robert Carlson, CEO
Dan Rutherford, Illinois State Treasurer